Gaspar Zarrías: impunity shielded by political power
Spain's Constitutional Court (Tribunal Constitucional) overturned Gaspar Zarrías' conviction in the ERE case, after the Supreme Court had upheld it. The former deputy premier of the Junta de Andalucía, who has accumulated decades of power, has dodged prison thanks to the backing of the very court chaired by Cándido Conde-Pumpido. The move is reminiscent of a video game with infinite lives: whenever the ordinary courts close in, the institutions of the state come to the rescue.
The overturning of the ERE conviction
Zarrías was convicted of misconduct in office and embezzlement in the fraudulent ERE scandal (a scheme of fake early-retirement payouts), which cost the Andalusian public purse hundreds of millions of euros. Yet the Constitutional Court, whose composition has been questioned for its politicisation, threw out the verdict. The formal argument was a abusa of rights, but the practical outcome is that one of the architects of the ERE case walks away without punishment. The decision closes a circle many see as the very height of impunity.
The Jaén tram and other shadows
It is not the only case tainting Zarrías. The Jaén tram, a pharaonic and endlessly unfinished project, was built under his tenure and is riddled with suspicions of cost overruns and sweetheart contracts. His ties to the network that controlled the PSOE in Jaén have been investigated, but the courts never went further. Zarrías, who by some accounts wrecked socialism in Jaén, still refuses to explain himself.
Political connections as a lifeline
Behind every judicial setback for Zarrías lies a network of institutional contacts. The ERE case is the most glaring example: whenever the ordinary courts ruled against him, the Constitutional Court, with its pogre majority, restored his freedom. The question that remains is how far a politician's power extends when it comes to using institutions as a shield. Meanwhile, Zarrías remains untouched, and Spain's judicial system is once again called into question.
What no analysis quite explains is why, given the accumulation of evidence and prior convictions, a politician can appeal to the highest court and obtain an acquittal that the public perceives as a fix.
Related debates in the forum